On April 14, 2003 the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), the Department of Energy (DOE) and their partners in the International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium announced the successful completion of the Human Genome Project.

I happen to have been there, and realising this was going to be a game changer.
So when I see old terms from Coon like Borreby and Brunn...

Ignore my tablet and it's wonderful typos it will have me writing Japanese next

I think we should do a thread dedicated to the phenotypes of the ancient Greeks and Romans it would be interesting, I also find Hannibal interesting as well as a good strategic leader.

Coon was groundbreaking in his day, but he was not able to access the scientific advances made after his death. The genome project.
Terms like Borreby and Brunn or Tronder type are from a bygone age.
We don't assess ancestry with calipers and colour charts anymore.
No ill will intended.

Coon was groundbreaking in his day, but he was not able to access the scientific advances made after his death. The genome project.
Terms like Borreby and Brunn or Tronder type are from a bygone age.
We don't assess ancestry with calipers and colour charts anymore.
No ill will intended.

Well he was way ahead of his time sure but anthropology is just pseudoscience anyway.

Well he was way ahead of his time sure but anthropology is just pseudoscience anyway.

Your input is always welcome

It wasn't pseudoscience at the time, it was the best they had.
The Yamnaya Culture was the origin of the Germanic language branch and Horse breeding, but whether people adopted the language because it was culturally dominant or whether there was a mass population replacement is not certain.
People in India speak English and drive BMW's. Because they are culturally superior devices. It does not make them Germanic people.

The Skythians were the inheritors of the Horse breeding phenomenon. The culture they practised was an Anthropologically verifiable event.
All Equestrian equipment has PIE or IE linguistic roots, in other words from the Yamnaya language base. Or Cultural base... ie anthropology.

It wasn't pseudoscience at the time, it was the best they had.
The Yamnaya Culture was the origin of the Germanic language branch and Horse breeding, but whether people adopted the language because it was culturally dominant or whether there was a mass population replacement is not certain.
People in India speak English and drive BMW's. Because they are culturally superior devices. It does not make them Germanic people.

The Skythians were the inheritors of the Horse breeding phenomenon. The culture they practised was an Anthropologically verifiable event.
All Equestrian equipment has PIE or IE linguistic roots, in other words from the Yamnaya language base. Or Cultural base... ie anthropology.

Yes but now we have things like autosomal DNA tests you can't just judge someone as you say from style, language geographic or culture. Yes, the Scythians domesticated the horse.

Now, as some here indicated the historical interbreeding of different physical types, how do we draw the line at who's white? Decide that only modern white people are descendants of Whites, regardless Nordic, Alpinic, Meds, Noric, Baltic, Faelid and et al? Pyrophlegton claims that Neolithics and Yamna weren't so different from each other, so how come their respective cultures were diametrically different? I'm not hairsplitting here just attempting to figure out the facts and plug the wholes to understand the truth about our ancestors.

They did not have diametric cultural differences either (at least not as much as we think of them today), and the fact is that most of what we know about ancient culture is a duality and a cultural mix between neolithic populations and the Bronze age invaders. Every country in Europe followed the same pattern regardless if we refer to Greece and Spain, or Germany, Britain and Sweden. For example, the "Saxon marking" that indicates the percentage of Saxon blood among the British, is definitely not PIE but neolithic (WHG-Megalithic culture) -only that it comes from northern Europe (Funnelbeaker, Linear Pottery), not southern (neolithic farmers).
Moreover Bronze age and in some extent Iron age, were practically an ancient "medieval" period. Some historians even call these years "Dark Ages" since every cultural evolution was suspended, every country faced wars which led to even more wars and most cities and citadels were crushed. Out of this turmoil, our traditional European world erupted.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PolishSlavAryan

Yes, however the Armenoid sub race and its Dinaric brother are European, right?

Dinarids are a result of a procedure that took place among the dolichocephalic group. While armenoids, occurred when brachycephalised east-mediterranoids and iranids, underwent a similar process. Their brachycephalisation took place when a branch of the ancient proto-alpinid stock migrated to Anatolia. Then dinarization followed.

Some anthropologists once believed that dinarids are the outcome of mixing between dolichocephalic and alpinoids basing their argument on their geographic expansion between these two large populations. But, this is somehow refuted due to the sculls found in Europe which belonged to dinaricized cromagnoids long before the coming of the brachycephalic group.
Anyway, dinarids come from a dolichocephalic and homogeneous European population. While armenoids, come from a West Asian brachycephalised mixed population. They share some common traits (which categorize them in a common metric category named taurid), but they are different. Still armenoids can be considered "europid" and caucasian (just like the Berbers) but not European or anyhow people name our race.

Dinarids are a result of a procedure that took place among the dolichocephalic group. While armenoids, occurred when brachycephalised east-mediterranoids and iranids, underwent a similar process. Their brachycephalisation took place when a branch of the ancient proto-alpinid stock migrated to Anatolia. Then dinarization followed.

Some anthropologists once believed that dinarids are the outcome of mixing between dolichocephalic and alpinoids basing their argument on their geographic expansion between these two large populations. But, this is somehow refuted due to the sculls found in Europe which belonged to dinaricized cromagnoids long before the coming of the brachycephalic group.
Anyway, dinarids come from a dolichocephalic and homogeneous European population. While armenoids, come from a West Asian brachycephalised mixed population. They share some common traits (which categorize them in a common metric category named taurid), but they are different. Still armenoids can be considered "europid" and caucasian (just like the Berbers) but not European or anyhow people name our race.

Your premises seems to be that Alpinids are non-European in origins.

However, I think there's evidence of Alpinid like people in Mesolithic Europe.

For example the Cheddar man reconstruction depicts a man with Alpinid like features.

See, it all baffles me, trying to connect the dots between physical anthropology, linguistics, race, history and DNA. Also, mind you that Lithuania is 40% N1C1 Y-DNA, which means that every 4 out of 10 (almost half the population) and the Devil-knows-how-much mtDNA is non-Indo-Europeans, nevertheless, when it comes to the Lithuanian language it's almost as pure as Proto-Indo-European could be. Whereas in Poland, where 60% of the males are descended from Yamna, the Polish language is much more differentiated from its PIE mother tongue than its Lithuanian neighbor...

Go figure!

This claim about the Lithuanian language is false. Their language is the most 'conservative' since it did not evolve by expanding its vocabulary with different words assimilating them to their own way of pronunciation and spelling. This doesn't mean that its the "most IE" language in Europe.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PolishSlavAryan

We can fairly say that Western Europeans have almost 100% male Indo-European Y-DNA, Eastern European have 95% Indo-European one, while in Southern Europe it's closer to 40% Aryan Y-DNA (both R1a and R1b). There are outlying areas such as Lithuania with a 40% Finno-Ugric y-DNA or Scandinavia and parts of the Balkan with Mesolithic Y-DNA (I1 in Scandinavia, up to 40%; up to 56% in the Balkan for I2 y-dna). Nonetheless, on our father side most of the European nations have exclusively a PIE heritage to the exclusion of almost all others.

I will write this one more time: by studying y-DNA haplogroups solely you will only indicate a person's or a population's distant paternal ancestry. It has not to do with their full genetic background. Also R1b was common among the neolithic farmers too, regardless if its rare frequency. Geneticists do not identify completely R1b and R1a with the PIE expansion, but as it seems their populations had larger percentages of these haplogroups among their males.

Still these statements of yours are clearly petty nationalist, since you are doing all you can to downgrade a whole part of Europe (probably the most homogeneous one) in order to make your own people look "great". We are all the descendants of a PIE and the neolithic cultures regardless of the fact that some descend from the east, west, north, south of Europe.

OK. I'm just clarifying because those terms are very reminiscent of Coon.

Here is a Greek for you.
Socrates in fact.
Brunn? Borreby? Alpine?
Chances are it is an artist's impression, but equally the Greeks were very skilled sculptors so it could be a genuine likeness.

Socrates' bust shows us a typical man classified as a alpinoid+borreby. It's well known that Socrates was not considered a pretty man by his fellow Athenians who called him "the philosopher who looks like a satyr", despite the fact that he was a decorated military officer and a fine lawmaker. His looks played their role in his execution too.
Anyway, he looks like the following Norwegian man.